omg, this guy still posts? I thought for sure that this last season would have shut him up by now but oh well.

bieksa'a play is not inconsistent, rather he has performed up to the best of his abilities at the tasks set out for him by the coaching staff. When we were an offensively challenged team he was called on to be offensive and he was effective. This last season and a half, as our offensive skills have improved, he has been asked to be a more defensive minded player and he has succeeded at that. No matter what role he has played, he has also been our toughness on the back end, and is one of the guys in the league that other players fear to anger.

Bieksa, Kesler and Burrows have been the heart and soul of this team throughout it's current incarnation. Their games have changed in response to what the team needed. They are the guys the coach taps on the shoulder when he needs something done, and they put their all into getting it done. Bieksa deserves every penny he earns, and every ounce of respect he's given. You deserve nothing but scorn.

Go crawl back under your rock.

0

Don't listen to the talking heads

But MG is playing chess out there, while most CDC'ers can only think in terms of a game of checkers.

I'd say they both left about a million on the table for the year they signed. When the cap increases as much as it did this year, salaries go up a like amount. Ultimately I'd say they're pretty simalr d-men in what they each bring with each having a stronger area than the other.

If you had to pick hammer or bieksa, who would you pick? plz don't disappoint me just to prove a point...

If you had to pick hammer or bieksa, who would you pick? plz don't disappoint me just to prove a point...

Both bring different aspects to the table with their overall game. Quite frankly, it'd be very hard to chose. Hamhuis is that solid, stay at home defensmen that makes a great first pass to get the rush going and is a poised defensemen, but Bieksa brings different aspects that are just as effective. Bieksa is more physical - in your face type of game. He can put up points as a top 4 defensemen but needs a solid defensemen to back him up in some cases. Enter Hamhuis.

It's the exact same situation with Weber-Suter. Weber plays the exact same type of game as Bieksa, and Suter plays the same way as Hamhuis. Who would've thunk a physical defensemen was completed by a stay at home, solid defensemen?

Hamhuis and Bieksa both compliment each other very well, and it's hard on who you'd choose. If you want to have a safe defensemen that you can rely on, pick Hamhuis. Or if you want a physical defensemen that you can rely on for playing an in-your-face game on a consistent basis, pick Bieksa.

Having Bieksa and Hamhuis together work for a reason, and clicked right off the bat when paired together, look at how it's working for Weber and Suter. They're better obviously, but that's besides the point.

Both bring different aspects to the table with their overall game. Quite frankly, it'd be very hard to chose. Hamhuis is that solid, stay at home defensmen that makes a great first pass to get the rush going and is a poised defensemen, but Bieksa brings different aspects that are just as effective. Bieksa is more physical - in your face type of game. He can put up points as a top 4 defensemen but needs a solid defensemen to back him up in some cases. Enter Hamhuis.

It's the exact same situation with Weber-Suter. Weber plays the exact same type of game as Bieksa, and Suter plays the same way as Hamhuis. Who would've thunk a physical defensemen was completed by a stay at home, solid defensemen?

Hamhuis and Bieksa both compliment each other very well, and it's hard on who you'd choose. If you want to have a safe defensemen that you can rely on, pick Hamhuis. Or if you want a physical defensemen that you can rely on for playing an in-your-face game on a consistent basis, pick Bieksa.

Having Bieksa and Hamhuis together work for a reason, and clicked right off the bat when paired together, look at how it's working for Weber and Suter. They're better obviously, but that's besides the point.

No comparison, really, 99.9% of the league would take Weber + anybody over Bxa + Hammer. Besides where was Bxa's supposed physicality or in your face type game vs the B"s.

If you had to pick hammer or bieksa, who would you pick? plz don't disappoint me just to prove a point...

If its for same money hammer but we dont have to choose one thats how we have depth

0

QUOTE(queen_canuck_fan)

cuz when I saw you outside in the bushes, by length I would have guessed 11...

QUOTE(Whiskey7 @ Apr 19 2007, 08:47 PM)

This is done in almost every sport, in every league, for a great player who has an "oooooo" sound in his name. I'm always a bit surprised when people don't pick up on it, and announcers on TV have to clarify for those at home.

No comparison, really, 99.9% of the league would take Weber + anybody over Bxa + Hammer. Besides where was Bxa's supposed physicality or in your face type game vs the B"s.

Bieksa 88 hits in 25 playoff games (Highest among the D)Hamhuis 43 hits in 19 games

Closest to Bieksa: Edler 78 hits in 25 games

Bieksa shooting %: 10.6% (highest among the D)3rd in points first in goals among D

With the D as thin as it was I somehow doubt fighting was on the menu for Bieksa. Do you really want your your best remaining shutdown d-man in the box for 5 or more under the circumstances? I'd wager AV preached discipline to the guys.

Before the Thomas show in the finals, Bieksa's name was even tossed in by analysts as a possibility for MVP along with Kesler. I don't recall Hammers name ever coming up in that regard. Like it or not, Bieksa was our best overall d-man in the playoffs.

Bieksa 88 hits in 25 playoff games (Highest among the D)Hamhuis 43 hits in 19 games

Closest to Bieksa: Edler 78 hits in 25 games

Bieksa shooting %: 10.6% (highest among the D)3rd in points first in goals among D

With the D as thin as it was I somehow doubt fighting was on the menu for Bieksa. Do you really want your your best remaining shutdown d-man in the box for 5 or more under the circumstances? I'd wager AV preached discipline to the guys.

Before the Thomas show in the finals, Bieksa's name was even tossed in by analysts as a possibility for MVP along with Kesler. I don't recall Hammers name ever coming up in that regard. Like it or not, Bieksa was our best overall d-man in the playoffs.

If their is a Conn Smythe candidate for the Vancouver Canucks as playoff MVP, it's defenseman Kevin Bieksa.

Bieksa has been huge for the Canucks in the playoffs, providing them with stellar defense, leadership, and big goals.

Bieksa scored the series winner against the San Jose Sharks in the Canucks five game series victory in the Western Conference Finals, but against the Bruins in the Cup Finals his task has been much more difficult.

Bieksa has had to play with several different teammates on his first defensive pairing line since Dan Hamhuis left Game 1 of the Finals with an injury and has yet to return.

Despite the lack of consistency on his pairing, Bieksa has played magnificently against Boston.

He is the only defenseman for the Canucks who will go after the Bruins and be physical with them.

"He's been so good for us," teammate Alex Burrows said Sunday. "He's a really strong guy, competes really hard, he prepares himself the right way. He's also a really good guy in the locker room. Guys enjoy being around him. He's a great teammate. And we know he's always going to be there for us. He can do it all on the ice. He's a complete package."

Many people believe Boston Bruins goalie Tim Thomas will win the Conn Smythe trophy even if the Bruins lose the series, but if there is one person on Vancouver who deserves to be the playoffs MVP, it's Kevin Bieksa.

Nicholas Goss is a Boston Bruins featured columnist for Bleacher Report, follow him on Twitter for Bruins playoff news and analysis.

Even our rivals' reporters have more credibility about Bieksa's value and worth than you.

You really are a friggin joke.....I want you to know that. I have absolutely no respect for you as a Canuck fan or a hockey fan. Your on-going humourous petulance has run out of humour. Had you just said, "well, he proved me wrong, and i'm big enough to admit it", I'd have given you complete slack......but your incessant idiotic analysis and statements have lost you really all that you have as a man....you've lost all your credibility and respect as far as I; concerned....and I know it doesn't mean anything to you if I say that....because at the end of the day, one person's opinion isn't all that big of a deal....but I would dare say that I am not alone in this sentiment. You're a running joke across CDC.....doesn't that gice you pause in your inanity for a moment even??

Whatever.....you keep acting the fool, if that's what you choose. We'll keep exposing your foolishness and the fool that you are, i suppose.

Both bring different aspects to the table with their overall game. Quite frankly, it'd be very hard to chose. Hamhuis is that solid, stay at home defensmen that makes a great first pass to get the rush going and is a poised defensemen, but Bieksa brings different aspects that are just as effective. Bieksa is more physical- in your face type of game. He can put up points as a top 4 defensemen but needs a solid defensemen to back him up in some cases. Enter Hamhuis.

It's the exact same situation with Weber-Suter. Weber plays the exact same type of game as Bieksa, and Suter plays the same way as Hamhuis. Who would've thunk a physical defensemen was completed by a stay at home, solid defensemen?

Hamhuis and Bieksa both compliment each other very well, and it's hard on who you'd choose. If you want to have a safe defensemen that you can rely on, pick Hamhuis. Or if you want a physical defensemen that you can rely on for playing an in-your-face game on a consistent basis, pick Bieksa.

Having Bieksa and Hamhuis together work for a reason, and clicked right off the bat when paired together, look at how it's working for Weber and Suter. They're better obviously, but that's besides the point.

Does Hamhuis fight, agitate, hit along the boards? No. He hipchecks, which is nice, but he doesn't do it every night.

No wonder why other boards everyone laughs at us... our own fans think Bieksa isn't that physical. I was going to throw stats that you wouldn't believe (The dreaded hits stat!) in this post, but Sharpshooter decided to show you up instead, and I thank him for that (for posting stats on a garbage post).

The fact you think Hamhuis is more physical, by posting one YouTube clip, shows that you're indeed not a close follower of this hockey team and just jumped on board when we went on a big playoff run.

i wouldnt choose either or because i like all of our defenseman.. o and by the way that alexander edler guy, yea he is very underrated.

from game 1 of the season to the last game of the playoffs i think he is our best overall defenseman. if he played all 82 games he would have had 50+ points. he is also underrated by his opponents because he hits hard and they dont see it coming.

Even our rivals' reporters have more credibility about Bieksa's value and worth than you.

You really are a friggin joke.....I want you to know that. I have absolutely no respect for you as a Canuck fan or a hockey fan. Your on-going humourous petulance has run out of humour. Had you just said, "well, he proved me wrong, and i'm big enough to admit it", I'd have given you complete slack......but your incessant idiotic analysis and statements have lost you really all that you have as a man....you've lost all your credibility and respect as far as I; concerned....and I know it doesn't mean anything to you if I say that....because at the end of the day, one person's opinion isn't all that big of a deal....but I would dare say that I am not alone in this sentiment. You're a running joke across CDC.....doesn't that gice you pause in your inanity for a moment even??

Whatever.....you keep acting the fool, if that's what you choose. We'll keep exposing your foolishness and the fool that you are, i suppose.

^^^your above post is the biggest load of crap you have posted in this thread so far. the second biggest load is this quote from the article.

He is the only defenseman for the Canucks who will go after the Bruins and be physical with them.

Oh yeah Bxa really manned up with Marchand eh? and wow, did he ever teach Lucic a lesson. How about going to Mayray's aid while he got his back broken? Bxa cannot do the job, nor has he ever done the job! He has been a big part of all the Nuck playoff failures for the last 5 years. He's not tough enough to play against, he is a pretender, period.

All your examples only include retaliation and fighting... How does that help your team win? Bxa failures in the scf mirrored the rest of the team. He was still one of OUR best players

0

QUOTE(queen_canuck_fan)

cuz when I saw you outside in the bushes, by length I would have guessed 11...

QUOTE(Whiskey7 @ Apr 19 2007, 08:47 PM)

This is done in almost every sport, in every league, for a great player who has an "oooooo" sound in his name. I'm always a bit surprised when people don't pick up on it, and announcers on TV have to clarify for those at home.

^^^your above post is the biggest load of crap you have posted in this thread so far. the second biggest load is this quote from the article.

Oh yeah Bxa really manned up with Marchand eh? and wow, did he ever teach Lucic a lesson. How about going to Mayray's aid while he got his back broken? Bxa cannot do the job, nor has he ever done the job! He has been a big part of all the Nuck playoff failures for the last 5 years. He's not tough enough to play against, he is a pretender, period.

lol

The only load of crap around here comes directly from your pie hole, on a consistent basis.

Bieksa is a top 2 dman.....his job isn't to go running around and picking fights with an oppositions' agitator, in the Stanley Cup finals. That job is reserved for the likes of Glass, Oreskovich, Lapierre and Torres. 2 of which are no longer on this team and a 3rd who more than likely may get replaced by guys who will step up in those roles.

We wouldn't expect a guy like Chara, with a Cup on the line in the last few games of the Finals, with his defence partner hurt and out of the line-up to go and start picking fights and taking instigating penalties against guys like Burrows, would you??

Actually, with your retarded thinking, you probably would.

Bieksa, again, was the top dman on the roster, and losing him for any significant time in the Stanley Cup Finals to go after a pest, would have been stupid and just left him open to charges of not being able to control himself when it mattered the most......much like you can't control the bucketfulls of crap that you constantly and consistently post in this thread.

But, hey....keep em coming, i'd be saddened if I didn't have you to point and laugh at while you showed everyone exactly why you're one of the biggest fools and no-nothing's posting on CDC.

The only load of crap around here comes directly from your pie hole, on a consistent basis.

Bieksa is a top 2 dman.....his job isn't to go running around and picking fights with an oppositions' agitator, in the Stanley Cup finals. That job is reserved for the likes of Glass, Oreskovich, Lapierre and Torres. 2 of which are no longer on this team and a 3rd who more than likely may get replaced by guys who will step up in those roles.

We wouldn't expect a guy like Chara, with a Cup on the line in the last few games of the Finals, with his defence partner hurt and out of the line-up to go and start picking fights and taking instigating penalties against guys like Burrows, would you??

Actually, with your retarded thinking, you probably would.

Bieksa, again, was the top dman on the roster, and losing him for any significant time in the Stanley Cup Finals to go after a pest, would have been stupid and just left him open to charges of not being able to control himself when it mattered the most......much like you can't control the bucketfulls of crap that you constantly and consistently post in this thread.

But, hey....keep em coming, i'd be saddened if I didn't have you to point and laugh at while you showed everyone exactly why you're one of the biggest fools and no-nothing's posting on CDC.

I don't think it matters what you say, which is unfortunate. This guy clearly has a one track mind, that being all negative things Bieksa. You actually bring substance to your argument where as this "pretender" just mashes his keyboard aimlessly. I'm on your side on this one and would say 40% of CDC is as well. ( the other 60 just make up the many trolls on the board )

^^^your above post is the biggest load of crap you have posted in this thread so far. the second biggest load is this quote from the article.

Oh yeah Bxa really manned up with Marchand eh? and wow, did he ever teach Lucic a lesson. How about going to Mayray's aid while he got his back broken? Bxa cannot do the job, nor has he ever done the job! He has been a big part of all the Nuck playoff failures for the last 5 years. He's not tough enough to play against, he is a pretender, period.

lol

Bieksa was tied up with Thorton when Sedin decided to let Marchand have his way with him.

Bieksa constantly battled lucic throughout the series and won the majority of those battles. Lucic was pretty much a non-factor in a series that completely favored his style of play.

0

Sent from my iPhone Canucks App

It is not my intent to get in circular arguments with anybody. The reason i have avoided saying anything specific is because i know you or someone else will attempt to find an alternate explanation to my points which i intern will have to defend. I see no point in getting involved with the circular argument that is already well under way in this thread. I simply intended to voice my opinion on the subject. In the end either you accept the possibility of corruption and conspiracy or you don't.

Also i find your comments to be very childish. Does taking what i say out of context, paraphrasing and misquoting it make you feel good about yourself? Grow up.

Does Hamhuis fight, agitate, hit along the boards? No. He hipchecks, which is nice, but he doesn't do it every night.

No wonder why other boards everyone laughs at us... our own fans think Bieksa isn't that physical. I was going to throw stats that you wouldn't believe (The dreaded hits stat!) in this post, but Sharpshooter decided to show you up instead, and I thank him for that (for posting stats on a garbage post).

The fact you think Hamhuis is more physical, by posting one YouTube clip, shows that you're indeed not a close follower of this hockey team and just jumped on board when we went on a big playoff run.

Move along now...

idiot complete idiot.. thats not what im saying at all plus my other accounts god banned because i rage back at tools like you... born in 93 and been a fan since then.. really started watching when nazzy joined the team tho

im not a no life thats spends 30 mins posting youtube videos to prove a point, i just chose one that showcases all his skills

if you think bieksa is more valuable than hammer, then i think it is you who should GTFO... bieksa is great, but hammer is the core of our defense, which allows bieksa to play more aggresively...

key point is the fact that in the finals, bieksa wasnt as good as he was in all the rounds previous, mainly because he didn't have hamhuis

idiot complete idiot.. thats not what im saying at all plus my other accounts god banned because i rage back at tools like you... born in 93 and been a fan since then.. really started watching when nazzy joined the team tho

im not a no life thats spends 30 mins posting youtube videos to prove a point, i just chose one that showcases all his skills

if you think bieksa is more valuable than hammer, then i think it is you who should GTFO... bieksa is great, but hammer is the core of our defense, which allows bieksa to play more aggresively...

key point is the fact that in the finals, bieksa wasnt as good as he was in all the rounds previous, mainly because he didn't have hamhuis

He wasn't great cause the team wasn't great in the finals. Any defensemen would suffer not playing with his regular partner. Are you telling me Hamhuis would be just as effective playing with Rome and Alberts as he was when playing with Bieksa? Weber wouldn't be as effective without Suter. Seabrook wouldn't be as effective without Keith. Heck Ballard wasn't effective at all without Tanev. And if any d-man should be titled "the core of our defense" I think that title should go to Edler, he's the closest we got to a number 1 defensemen.

Every good defensive tandem has one stay at home d-man, and one more aggressive d-man. Yes your right Hamhuis allows Bieksa to play more aggressive, but I wouldn't consider that as Hamhuis the more valuable of the pair. They are both contributing in ways their skill set allows them to. Bieksa is able to play a more shutdown role when called upon, he did actually play it most of the regular season, he only started playing more aggressive towards the end of the season and the playoffs. But for the pairing to have more balance offensively and defensively, someone needs to be aggressive, and sure that Hamhuis guy is amazing, but he definitely aint the one thats going to be the rushing the puck!

I just think its unfair how people say things like "well Bieksa can only play that way because Hamhuis covers him". But in reality, that is done by design! Thats how the coaches want the pairing to be so it has a balance! That is why Edler seems like a better defensive player when he played with Salo rather than Ehrhoff. Because Salo pulls a lot more weight in the defensive zone than Ehrhoff, it allows Edler to be more aggressive. Yet even though Salo does more of the defensive work, I don't hear people saying Salo is the more important player of the pairing.

People, you need to understand the concepts of "complimentary players" and "players filling a role".

Most people think the Sedins wouldn't be as good if they were seperated. Does this mean we should pay them how much we think they would be worth if they didn't play together?

idiot complete idiot.. thats not what im saying at all plus my other accounts god banned because i rage back at tools like you... born in 93 and been a fan since then.. really started watching when nazzy joined the team tho

im not a no life thats spends 30 mins posting youtube videos to prove a point, i just chose one that showcases all his skills

Congratulations on saying you're a fan?

No instead you post one video claiming that Hamhuis is more physical but yet leave out any videos of Bieksa being physical.

if you think bieksa is more valuable than hammer, then i think it is you who should GTFO... bieksa is great, but hammer is the core of our defense, which allows to play more aggresively...

I didn't say Bieksa is more valuable now did I? Also, thanks for agreeing with what I've been saying, but I'm sure as you said it is more right, right? Also thanks for another offense of the rules on me, you lose all creditability when using personal attacks.

key point is the fact that in the finals, bieksa wasn't as good as he was in all the rounds previous, mainly because he didn't have hamhuis

Once again, you just repeat my point. Hamhuis is what completes Bieksa and let's him play his own game, which is playing more physical.

They laugh at us because I've liked Dave Bolland since his London Knight days? Sorry, I never knew just because they're rivals I can't have my username as abllayer I've liked before heneven reached the NHL...

The fact you LIKE Dave Bolland is enough for me .. he plays the game like a slime ball .. and is gutless as he ONLY tries to provoke those stars who he knows won't retaliate .. even the players on his own team most likely and secretly think he is a turd!! .. at least that has always been my experience .. I have played with a few similar players and deep down they are an embarassment to the class of a team .. so bear the name well, "Dave" .. it suits you ..

0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said" ~ Mark Twain ~

wtf is with the moderators on this site? you let threads like this and the burrows one go on for like 2 years with the most childish and stupid I told you so bumps. Why not just shut it down and leave it in the history?

Keeping stupid crap here rather than all over the board makes the board better.

If Canuckelion is kept to here then we don't get all the other mouth breather who are too afraid to come back in here because they know they'll get ridiculed to death getting ideas to start vomiting bile all over the place.

This thread weeded out the stupid. Read the first 50 pages or so, no pick out posters who were truly just thoughtlessly hating. Now go see how many of them still post. You'll fine the number is 1 still posts frequently and you may find another one who's posted a few things since christmas.